MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400202395 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080151

SPEctacle Correction for the TReatment of Amblyopia (SPECTRA): study protocol for a prospective non-randomised interventional trial in adults with anisometropic/mixed mechanism amblyopia

2024· article· en· W4400202395 on OpenAlexaff
Ken W. S. Tan, Adela So Yun Park, Blossom W. S. Cheung, Ginny Hei Ting Wong, Benjamin Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHong Kong GovernmentHong Kong Polytechnic University
KeywordsMedicineStrabismusVisual acuityStereoscopic acuityOptometryRefractive errorOphthalmologyRandomized controlled trialContrast (vision)Prospective cohort studySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Amblyopia is a neurodevelopmental vision disorder typically affecting one eye, resulting in compromised binocular function. While evidence-based treatments exist for children, there are no widely accepted treatments for adults. This trial aims to assess the efficacy of appropriate optical treatment in improving vision and visual functions in adults with amblyopia. This is hypothesised to significantly improve visual acuity of the amblyopic eye and other visual functions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: SPEctacle Correction for the TReatment of Amblyopia is a prospective non-randomised interventional trial. The following criteria for amblyopia will be used: best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) in the amblyopic eye of 0.3 to 1.0 (inclusive) logMAR VA and in the fellow eye, 0.1 logMAR or better, with an interocular VA difference of ≥2 logMAR lines. Eligible participants aged 18-39 will receive full/near-full optical treatment requiring wear for at least half their waking hours for the trial duration. A difference of ≥1.00D spherical equivalent between a participant's current refractive correction and the study prescription is required for eligibility. Primary outcome is the change in amblyopic eye BCVA from baseline to 24-week postenrolment. Secondary outcomes include distance and near VA of both eyes, stereoacuity, contrast sensitivity, interocular suppression, angle of strabismus and fixation stability measured at monthly intervals. Visual evoked potentials will also be measured at baseline, week 12 and week 24. Treatment compliance and quality of life for all participants will be monitored.Analyses comparing baseline and week 24 will utilise pairwise comparisons. Linear mixed models will be fitted to the data for measures taken monthly. This allows estimates and inferences to be drawn from the coefficients of the model, while handling missing data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Human ethics approval was obtained from the respective ethics board of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HSEARS20210915002) and the University of Waterloo (#44235). The study protocol will conform to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05394987; clinicaltrials.org.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.010

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.391 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment StudiesFrench-language works237,207